One should write all new business apps in .net and Silverlight, Not JS and HTML , at least according to this guy, what do you think?
4 plus ones
Shared publicly•View activity
View 18 previous comments
- Mmm I don't think I have ever seen such an egregious problem in a true enterprise .net app :-) What world are you in?Nov 14, 2011
- Oleg lives in the world of actually-existing-HTMl-apps. SalesForce is the most successful "enterprise web app" I can think of. And yet it's UX ... and that of the Force.com apps being built on its platform ... behave exactly as Oleg describes them.
Tom, you have a vision of what an "enterprise web app" should be ... and what constitutes acceptable as opposed to "egregious" behavior. But that doesn't align very well with the apps that exist in the wild today.
I expect that to change. I hope they are swept away by a new breed of Single Page Apps written in HTML 5 with well structured, tested, maintainable JS ... you know, the kind that you can write. But today ... let us be honest ... such apps are rare.
Yes, there are thousands of terrible .NET business apps. They just struggle to be as terrible as the average HTML business app.
What I find is that the standard of UX is much higher in even the worst .NET apps. The standard is no NOT higher because .NET programmers are better - they may be far worse programmers for all I know. The apps are better because it is simply that much easier to deliver a large .NET app in WinForms, WPF, or Silverlight than it is in HTML/JS ... today.
A brighter tomorrow is coming fast. I welcome its prompt arrival.Nov 15, 2011
- interesting you mention Single Page Apps. Is this a common pattern in the dot net world? I was washed with a luke-warm response by my team today when I pitched the idea that a multi-page, form driven, html (with less emphasis on js/ajax) "app" would be easier to maintain, and overall give us a better cost of ownership as well as UX.Nov 15, 2011
- What world I am in? Exactly my point:)
Please, don't get me wrong - web itself is great. And bad .net (client) apps exist. LOT of them. What I am saying - developing business app for browser (browser, not web - big difference) I have to fight against its "point-and-click", "reading-oriented", "client-server" nature all the time. It's improving, yes, but - why should I fight it in the first place?
Sometimes I think the whole "browser as a platform" thing is just an artificial patch for striking inability of MS to make installation story right. Look at the iPhone/iPad where it's done better. Suddenly web apps are not so cool anymore. Any user of iPhone will tell you web apps suck. But Internet in general is still most important there.Nov 16, 2011
- I think we need a competition. 6 months, 300 screens, 90% code coverage, unit tests for all business logic, secure single sign-on, threat analyzed with a limited attack surface, integration tests, robust usability determined by SUS Usability Scale, scales well, multi-tiered, service oriented, heavy transactions, high performance UI, and maybe throw in data access from multiple data sources cloud, private on premise database, and third party web services. Oh and it has to work flawlessly on the target platform.
The target platform for anyone deploying to a web browser is support for every browser out there since the end user is going to ignore your requirement to only run on the browser you designed it for. And you know that pesky decision making manager is going to try to run some heavy transaction on his Android phone browser or his iPad browser, so you better test and support both of those while your at it.
Desktop teams can choose any desktop technology out there, heck try doing it in TCL/TK or OpenVMS for fun... Actually you would probably win if you used OpenVMS using a green screen. Corporate users love those things.
I am in total agreement with Ward. WPF and .Net are really strong, efficient technologies right now for corporate line of business applications. The development infrastructure and examples out there are robust and useful. Your target platform, Windows, is nearly ubiquitous in corporations. I know Windows used to be DLL hell, but now HTML5 is Browser hell! I would rather work on business logic than managing browser fragmentation with fallbacks and modernizr... HTML5 has a ways to go to become mature and powerful for mainline corporate developers, and I am one of those. Oh and yes we do deploy our "content broadcasting" dashboards for those pesky managers to use on their iPads and phones using HTML4, for now...Nov 21, 2011
- "But until that lucky day ... the worst .NET dev beats the better-than-average HTML app developer". I've seen some horrible .NET developers and I'm saddened you think so lowly of "average HTML app developers".
I know the point your trying to make, but your blowing it way out of proportion. I'm afraid even .NET isn't productive enough to outbalance .NET bad developers with "better than average" HTML developers. It was 3 years ago, but not today.
As an aside, your article is very well written. I'm personally a massive HTML5 / node.js promoter and dislike .NET. However as much as I love to personally promote those technologies, you simply can't argue with the lower learning curve on .NET and the rich supply of knowledgeable developers. Anyone who says otherwise is being silly. (Mind you, personally I can build a better application with HTML/JS then .NET but I'm the exception to the rule.)Nov 24, 2011